Why did the Muslim empires in North Africa not go deep south across the contient

Mar 2019
14
Oakland, California
they might not have been considered worthy of conquest as one user stated, simply because there might not be riches there, big empires means riches, or mining means riches, people many not have been actively engaged in mining or wide spread agricultural activity which would start making riches for the african people, probably what attracted the romans to europe in contrast was its riches and mining, several gold artifacts predating romans have been found in western europe which indicates wealth, im not very learned on european history so cannot say much on this neither african history. probably what europe earlier sought was mass slavery after discovering the new world, the arabs were also engaged in the slavery but they didn't want as much slaves as the european new lands demanded.

if africans had been mining they would have got lots of gold and diamond and became rich very easily and attracted greedy eyes.

regards
@Ashoka maurya : According to the Bible, in Genesis 2:13 (Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 2 - King James Version) it is said that out of the Garden of Eden flowed the river Gihon, which encompasseth the whole land of the Ancient Ethiopians. Who were the Ancient Ethiopians? According to another article about the Gihon river (Gihon - Wikipedia), Josephus (Josephus - Wikipedia) in the first century said that Gihon river, which encompassed the land of the Ancient Ethiopians was the Nile. The Blue Nile (Blue Nile - Wikipedia) or also known as the Abay River of the modern country of Ethiopia is believed to be the Gihon. Also, have you read of the Ancient Macrobians? The Macrobians (Macrobians - Wikipedia) were mentioned by Herodotus (Herodotus - Wikipedia) in the fifth century BCE. They are believed to be the ancestors of the modern Ethiopians. It is said that their prisoners were chained in shackles of gold. Have you heard of the Land of Punt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Punt)? It is also believed to be an ancestral kingdom of Ethiopia. It was said to be known for producing and exporting gold.
 

Ichon

Ad Honorem
Mar 2013
3,508
Greeks and Romans were the first to mine on a truly industrial scale but the main source of gold was usually panning from rivers outside of a few select areas with rich deposits even in the Roman Empire. There have been found numerous small shaft mines in Africa and the Egyptian dynasties did some rather extensive mining but plenty of gold can be found without mining. Also while gold is nice it is other trade goods that usually commanded the most interest. Africa produced and traded most things other peoples wanted while Africa was also a harsh environment and on the way to no where else so far as ancient civilizations knew.
 
Mar 2019
14
Oakland, California
We've also got to realize that from the beginning of the 3nd century the Axumite kingdom was conquesting South Arabia (GDRT - Wikipedia) until the end of the 6th century (Aksumite–Persian wars - Wikipedia). That was 400 years. The Prophet of Islam, Muhammad, was born 570 AD (Muhammad in Islam - Wikipedia). There is a story that the King of Axum at that time, Negus Saifu, sent gifts to Muhammad when he was born, and so did Saifu's grandson at a later time (Saifu - Wikipedia).
 
Mar 2019
14
Oakland, California
@Ichon Look, I don't think what you posted is at all relevant. The question @greatstreetwarrior asked was "why did the muslim empires in north Africa not go deep south across the continent". Your post seems to be promoting the Greeks and Romans. The closest you came to the subject was saying that Africa was a harsh environment, but you failed to connect what you said to the original question. You should've said something like, "Because Africa was a harsh environment the Muslim empires in North Africa did not go deep south across the continent."
 
Feb 2019
211
California
With Islamic empires having consolidated their presence and before the arrival of the European colonial powers, the Muslims up north in Maghreb had enough land and resources to go southwards deep into the African continent. Why is that they did not go southwards of the Saharan desert into places like Congo, Kenya, Ethiopia, Zimbawe etc. and spread their empire further downwards since they faced no competition from Europeans who were far off from these lands to gain access. Shouldnt this have been a logical strategy to follow?

That desert thing.......
 
Mar 2013
3,508
@Ichon Look, I don't think what you posted is at all relevant. The question @greatstreetwarrior asked was "why did the muslim empires in north Africa not go deep south across the continent". Your post seems to be promoting the Greeks and Romans. The closest you came to the subject was saying that Africa was a harsh environment, but you failed to connect what you said to the original question. You should've said something like, "Because Africa was a harsh environment the Muslim empires in North Africa did not go deep south across the continent."
I was responding to this-

they might not have been considered worthy of conquest as one user stated, simply because there might not be riches there, big empires means riches, or mining means riches, people many not have been actively engaged in mining or wide spread agricultural activity which would start making riches for the african people, probably what attracted the romans to europe in contrast was its riches and mining, several gold artifacts predating romans have been found in western europe which indicates wealth, im not very learned on european history so cannot say much on this neither african history. probably what europe earlier sought was mass slavery after discovering the new world, the arabs were also engaged in the slavery but they didn't want as much slaves as the european new lands demanded.

if africans had been mining they would have got lots of gold and diamond and became rich very easily and attracted greedy eyes.
There was plenty of alluvial gold deposits and where there weren't like Eypgpt mines were extensively used but the main reason is that trade items of interest were extracted without need for conquest though some limited wars did occur Islam spread deep into Africa via trade. Not even sure what the original post was at this point- responded to this thread ages ago in that regard.
 
Greeks and Romans were the first to mine on a truly industrial scale
im not sure about greeks and romans, but indian mining start really early, from the bronze ages, carnelian, lapis lezuli, copper were extensively mined in india, Indians infact mined so much/used resources so much that they converted some of the areas in deserts in western pakistan, indians in the south also started mining diamonds and iron very early and wootz steal was manufactured as early as seventh or sixth BC. i dont think that greeks and romans were the first to mine on industrial scale, i think all bronze age civilizations started mining extensively.

regards
 

Similar History Discussions